Combining Simulation-based Training and Flipped Classroom in
Project Management Learning
Received: June 7, 2018 Accepted: June 22, 2018 Online Published: xx, 2018
doi:10.5539/ URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/
Every year, countless projects are finished
late, go over budget or end up being cancelled, often because their project
managers and project teams lack the necessary tools and techniques to support
their decision-making. Students of project management courses around the world
have difficulty integrating the different knowledge areas of project
management, after studying each knowledge area separately. Students then
struggle and even fail when it comes to applying these concepts in a real-life
project. Simulation-based training contributes to the solution of these
problems by linking the concepts learned during a project management course and
providing the experience of managing a simulated project that serves as
preparation for real life. The objective of this research is to study the impact
of simulation-based training and flipped classroom methodology on students
learning project management. The contribution of this research is twofold. First,
from a theoretical perspective, simulation-based training and flipped classroom
methodology literature is enriched and broadened by applying both teaching
tools. Second, from a practical perspective, an improvement in results,
satisfaction and lessons learned was found when using simulation-based training
under flipped classroom methodology compared to simulation-based training in a
traditional classroom.
Keywords: flipped
classroom, project management, simulation-based
training
1.1
Simulation-based Training
With
the use of simulation-based training, students can take risks without any
unwanted or unfortunate consequences they could face in the real world managing
a real project.
Salas,
Wildman and Piccolo (2009) lists the advantages of simulation-based training
for management learning as follows: Simulation-based training is superior to
other training strategies for imparting complex applied competencies and can
lead to learning in a reduced timeframe. Simulation-based training provides a
more complex and realistic learning environment than other training strategies
and more rapidly allows for reality to be simplified and manageable. It also
provides a (relatively) risk-free environment for learning and experimentation.
This is an ideal method for training infrequently engaged but critical skills
and can be quite affordable, is (usually) simple to learn and operate; is a
form of learner-controlled training and is inherently more engaging than other
training methods.
In
several studies, the successful use of a simulator for teaching project
management has been recorded (Davidovitch, Parush, & Shtub, 2006, 2008,
2009; Perez, 2015). Working with a simulator provides the opportunity for
reflective observation. Particularly in simulation-based training, the
different scenarios and data items in the simulator enable the
conceptualization and integration of ideas and models considered throughout the
learning process. Moreover, the simulator provides a continuous and dynamic
environment for active experimentation and is rapidly establishing itself as a
critical factor influencing the transfer of learning (Alessi, 1988).
1.2
Flipped Classroom Methodology
Flipped
classroom methodology is a type of blended learning, which reverses the
traditional educational arrangement by delivering instructional content outside
of the classroom.
Fulton
(2012) listed the following advantages of the flipped classroom methodology:
Students move at their own pace while doing “homework” in class, giving
teachers a better insight into student difficulties and learning styles. Teachers
can more easily customize and update the curriculum and provide it to students
24/7; classroom time can be used more effectively and creatively and teachers
using the method report seeing increased levels of student achievement,
interest, and engagement. Learning theory supports the new approaches and the
use of technology is flexible and appropriate for “21st century learning".
Since
1997, when the flipped classroom methodology was developed by Eric Mazur, it
has received significant attention-papers were published (Tucker, 2012; Herreid
& Schiller, 2013; Bishop & Verleger, 2013) and it has been suggested (Roehl,
Reddy, & Shannon, 2013; Strayer, 2012; Lichvar, Hedges, Benedict, &
Donihi, 2016) that using class time for active learning provides opportunities
for greater teacher-to-student mentoring, peer-to-peer collaboration and
cross-disciplinary engagement.
1.3 The Simulator
The Project Team Builder training simulator was
used in this research. Using the Project Team Builder, students can either
rewind or fast-forward the development process to see what kind of challenges
they may face and how one decision can affect their choices in the future. These
challenges force the student to make higher-quality decisions and consider
alternative methods for performing the project under uncertainty. To provide a
higher level of functional fidelity, the Project Team Builder includes two
functionalities that are not available in other project management simulators:
(1) the ability to control the level of human resources, and (2) the ability to
control the execution of the tasks.
The ability to control the level of human resources
refers to the decision to assign or release resources in accordance with the
changing demand over the course of the project; the student can manage the
number of employees in the project in order to match availability to needs. The
ability to control the execution of the tasks refers to the decision to split
tasks during execution. A task can begin, be adjourned and continue later.
Shtub (2004) outlined these principles of the
Project Team Builder: “A simulation approach: the trainer simulates one or more
projects. The simulation is controlled by a simple user interface and no
knowledge of simulation or simulation languages is required. A case study
approach: the trainer is based on simulation of case studies. Each case study
is a project or a collection of projects performed under schedule, budget, and
resource constraints, in a deterministic and dynamic stochastic environment. A
dynamic approach: the case studies built into the trainer may be dynamic in the
sense that the situation changes over time. A random effect may be introduced
to simulate the uncertainty in the environment, and decisions made by the user
cause changes in the state of the system simulated.”
This simulator developed at the Technion has been
proved successful in many educational institutions and companies (Iluz, Moser,
& Shtub, 2015).
Project planning in the Project Team Builder tool: In the Project Team Builder, the Gantt view, where tasks and durations are represented in a graph, is based on the most likely time of the planned task. Resources planning is performed by using the Resources Graph, which includes information about the maximum availability of each resource with information about the tasks using this resource.
Project budgeting is supported by the budget report, including the accumulated daily income/cost and the maximum available cash.
Running the simulation: While running the simulation in the Project Team Builder, the planned task time is changed to the actual task time. Due to uncertainty, project duration may differ from the planned during the execution. The student may manually change the task start time in order to comply with project constraints.
2. Design of the Experiment
Three universities were selected for this
experiment, located on three continents, each one with a different instruction
language, emphasizing in this way the intercultural approach of the research.
All the courses are project management
courses, have the same number of academic hours per week (four hours) and cover
fundamental aspects of project management, such as scheduling, budgeting
requirements, planning, bottlenecks, resource allocation, cash flow, risks and
decision-making.
The course at the Technion is taught to an
average of 70 students per semester and is offered to students in their third
out of four years of study. The course at the Universidad Tecnológica Nacional,
is offered to students in their fourth out of five years of study, is attended
by an average of 30 students per year. The course at the University of Nicosia
is offered to students in the third year and attracts an average of 15 students
each semester.
2.1 Flipping the Classroom
Outside the classroom: E-Learning courses (including videos and readings) were developed for the two flipped classroom methodology courses to support the simulation-based training experience the students performed in the classrooms. All the students had lectures throughout the semester and exercises to do at home, when using the flipped classroom methodology for the relevant topics; the students learned the theoretical material on their own before the lectures.
In the classroom: The lecturer reviewed and extended the learning content by means of slides and videos and by using the simulator. Lecturers and students discussed the material in depth, increasing interaction and collaboration between teachers and students. Students got quizzes (multiple-choice tests) at the beginning of some classes, as an "entry ticket" to the active learning environment where problem-solving, requiring higher-order thinking skills, took place (Miri, David, & Uri, 2007). These short quizzes were used primarily as an evaluation tool, but since the students knew they were going to be tested using a quiz, the preparation for the quizzes and the evaluations themselves were also part of the learning process.
2.2 Project Simulations
The simulation-based training included
predefined projects. For each project, each task has one, two or three different
modes and each mode has a different duration of the corresponding task. The
predecessors of each task, resources, and costs were predefined parameters. The
student was required to finish the project by the due date, maximize profit and
value, and minimize waste. In the case of late completion of the project, a
penalty was applied; in the case of early completion, a bonus (per period) is
added to the project income. The duration and cost of the tasks were
deterministic in the first scenario and stochastic in the second scenario. Each
task takes an integer number of periods to be completed. The scenarios include
four types of data: general information, task information, cash flow
information and resource information. The objective function for both scenarios
was to maximize the value (benefit in Project Team Builder terminology) and
minimize the total cost, within the target period, target cost and cash
constraints.
Scenario description: All students used the same Project Team Builder version and ran the same two scenarios. First scenario: A seven-task project under a deterministic environment (i.e., all the decisions were made with 100% certainty). Students had a target period of 12 periods and a single resource to manage. They had one academic hour to run and to complete as many scenarios as possible.
Second scenario: An eight-task project under
a stochastic environment (under uncertainty). Students had a target period of
27 periods and three resources to manage. They had two academic hours to
complete as many runs as possible.
Simulation procedure: The simulation took place in a computer classroom, in order to
control performance and to avoid sharing information among students. During the
simulations, students had several tasks: Manage time by planning and meeting a
schedule, the resources involved in the project, and making sure that the
project is performed at the minimum cost. They have to manage the costs and
incomes to control the cash flow and cash position to prevent bankruptcy during
the project, as well as manage the value so that the project’s results are
satisfactory, maximizing the objective function:
2.3 Experimental Conditions
Under the flipped classroom methodology, all
students had access to the e-Learning course outside the classroom and to more
advanced lectures inside the classroom; in a traditional classroom, all
students had just traditional lectures. In Argentina and Israel, all the
material as well as presentations and homework were assigned in Spanish and
Hebrew, respectively. In Cyprus, all the material was provided in English since
classes at the University of Nicosia are held in English. The simulator and all
its functions are written in English. In all the courses, all the students had
to fill out an initial questionnaire at the beginning of the experiment with
personal details about themselves and a final questionnaire at the end about
their experience and satisfaction. For all groups, the two Project Team Builder
scenarios were used in the experiment, in consecutive teaching weeks in the
middle of the semester (not necessarily consecutive calendar weeks).
The results of the simulation were measured
using the following performance indices, under the predefined objective
functions: Project cost, project value or benefit, project time duration, and project
cash. The results of the performance in class and knowledge in project
management were measured using the following tests: Quizzes (in the flipped classroom
methodology) and Knowledge self-evaluation (in a traditional classroom).
For all the courses, questionnaires were
used to collect information about the characteristics of the students.
A small pilot with five students was carried
out in Israel during March 2016, to plan the logistics, check time-consumption
of scenarios and verify the comprehension of the learning material, as well as
the difficulty level of each scenario. Feedback reported by the participants
about all the simulations was used to improve the real experiment. The pilot
proved that an average student could complete several simulations (3 to 5 for the
first scenario and 1 to 3 for the second scenario). However, it is possible
that some students would fail to complete the simulation.
Hypothesis 1: Mean results (ratio
value/cost) in scenarios under the flipped classroom methodology combined with simulation-based
training are higher than mean results (ratio value/cost) in scenarios in a traditional
classroom combined with simulation-based training.
Hypothesis 2: There is a correlation between
the flipped classroom methodology performance, and simulation-based training
results.
3. Methods and
Techniques of Analysis
Data were collected from three different
sources: The simulator (the ratio value/cost of the simulations), quizzes and questionnaires.
The analyses were aimed at testing whether
the observed differences between the means of data samples were significant,
and at exploring the relationships between the observed variables. T-tests and
ANOVA was used for analysis. Variability gauge charts allowed us to know more
about the learning process of the students and the frequency distribution
charts illustrated the characteristics of various outcomes.
4.1
Descriptive Statistics
In this
section, the characteristics of the four different courses were quantitatively
described with respect to participation and absenteeism of the students.
Participation: One hundred and ninety (190) students participated in the experiment: 89 students under the flipped classroom methodology (52 from the Technion and 37 from the Universidad Tecnológica Nacional) and 101 in a traditional classroom (92 from the Technion and 9 from the University of Nicosia). In total, 179 students participated in the first scenario and 170 in the second scenario.
Absenteeism: Students were motivated to maximize value, and minimize waste and project duration, within the given constraints. In other research, empirical evidence (Greene, Miller, Crowson, Duke, & Akey, 2004) suggests that the motivation, persistence and purpose promotes higher-order thinking among the students and therefore increases the chance of success. As such, in Argentina, although not mandatory, students had to participate in the simulations to avoid a midterm; in Israel, the simulations represented 10% of the grade; in Cyprus, they were part of the course.
In
case of absenteeism, students were not allowed to complete missed simulations
to avoid sharing information. The absenteeism for both courses at the Technion was
low while at the Universidad Tecnológica Nacional and the University of
Nicosia, the absenteeism was remarkably higher; the total absenteeism was 2.1%.
Seemingly,
the motivation factor was part of these differences in the absenteeism level
since in both courses at the Technion it was similar but not at the Universidad
Tecnológica Nacional and at the University of Nicosia. In these two
universities, the same percentage for the first scenario is discerned but a
peak in the second scenario, especially in Argentina due to an extraordinary
event (the day of the second scenario there was a manifestation on the street
of the Universidad Tecnológica Nacional that made it impossible for some
students to attend).
4.2
Initial Questionnaires
The
scale in the questionnaires goes from 1 to 5 and was converted from 20 to 100
in order to use the same scale as the results obtained in the Project Team
Builder simulations.
Regarding
the teaching methodology at the university, both groups were almost equally
satisfied with its effectiveness (68 for flipped classroom methodology and
68.86 for the traditional classroom). The traditional classroom group seems to
be more satisfied with the current classrooms at their universities (63.30 vs.
61.88). Nevertheless, the flipped classroom methodology group was more
satisfied with the material delivered by professors and teaching assistants
(73.18 vs. 70.10).
The
question that got the lowest grade was “how easy can you integrate all the
concepts learned in each course?” (63.53 for flipped classroom methodology and
57.11 for the traditional classroom) coinciding with the statement that
motivated us to do this research (“students of project management courses
around the world have difficulty integrating the lessons learned”).
The
traditional classroom group is more satisfied with the learning methodology
classrooms at the university (67.22 vs. 62.12). In parallel, they claim they
have a considerably better English comprehension level (80.62 vs. 73.88).
With
respect to the software approach, both groups have a similar evaluation about
how helpful the tool can be (81.88 for flipped classroom methodology vs. 81.44
for the traditional classroom). The traditional classroom group claims they
understand more easily how to use new software in comparison with the flipped classroom
methodology group (77.11 vs. 74.12). Students from both groups find it very
natural to work alone with a computer (81.16 for flipped classroom methodology
vs. 80.94 for the traditional classroom).
Students
from both groups prefer to study alone or with a partner, and consider profit
and value generated to stakeholders the most important aspects in a project. It
is clear that those students who prefer studying alone chose profit as the main
aspect in a project but in contrast, those who prefer studying with a partner
chose value to stake holders over profit.
In
regards to experience in project management, project management software and Project
Team Builder software, most of the students from both groups have no experience
in project management or project management software (72% of them) and more
than 90% of them have never used the Project Team Builder in the past.
4.3
Flipped Classroom Course Performance
The
performance of the students in the different quizzes at the Technion was
notably low: The average grade was 38.17 out of 100. At the Universidad
Tecnológica Nacional, the performance was considerably higher than at the
Technion.
4.4
Results of Simulations
The
main hypothesis is that results using the Project Team Builder simulator are
better when students are under the flipped classroom methodology than those in
a traditional classroom. Two studies (Henderson & Trotta, 2016; Liu et al.,
2017) proved that the flipped classroom methodology is a successful learning
methodology that has been researched effectively in undergraduate courses as
well as in this experiment when combining the flipped classroom methodology
with simulation-based training; this is consistent with a recent research from
2017 in nursing education (Kim & Jang, 2017).
According
to a t-test, there is a significant difference in the ratio value/cost
(p<0.0014) when students are under the flipped classroom methodology for the
first scenario: 87.68 vs. 79.20, comparing the Technion flipped classroom methodology
vs. the Technion traditional classroom (p<0.0038): 87.99 vs. 79.50. Furthermore,
we identified very similar results for both the Technion flipped classroom methodology
vs. the Universidad Tecnológica Nacional flipped classroom methodology (87.99
vs. 87.18) and the Technion traditional classroom vs. the University of Nicosia
traditional classroom (79.50 vs. 76.00) for the first scenario.
Regarding
the second scenario, there is no significant difference (p<0.2594) but
indeed the mean is higher (76.99 vs. 74.60) and the standard deviation is lower
(21.57 vs 26.68) for the flipped classroom methodology group. The same
phenomenon takes place comparing the Technion flipped classroom methodology to
the Technion traditional classroom (81.61 vs. 77.53 and 6.42 vs. 22.26) and the
Universidad Tecnológica Nacional flipped classroom methodology to the
University of Nicosia traditional classroom (66.96 vs. 37.71 and 35.67 vs.
47.45).
A
significant difference (p<0.0001) was found in the completed runs when using
the flipped classroom methodology for the first scenario. It is higher also in the
second scenario, although it is not significant (p<0.2722).
Regarding
those who failed (i.e., the number of students who could not complete even one
scenario) no flipped classroom methodology failures were found in the first
scenario and more failures in a traditional classroom in the second scenario
(11% vs 7%), although not significant.
The phenomenon is distinguishable: Below three
completed runs, the traditional classroom
group has more students, but there are more flipped classroom
methodology students above four completed runs.
Besides, not a single student from the traditional classroom
group completed seven runs. The ratio, with the exception of those who
completed two scenarios in the first scenario, was always higher under the flipped
classroom methodology.
Analogically,
if the mean represents the value and the completed scenarios the quantity, then
there is higher value and more quantity when simulation-based training is
combined with the flipped classroom methodology. In conclusion, it was proved
that mean results for the flipped classroom methodology combined with simulation-based
training were higher than for the traditional classroom combined with simulation-based
training.
4.5
Correlation between Flipped Classroom Methodology Performance and Simulation-based
Training Results
To
prove this hypothesis, for the flipped classroom methodology group, flipped classroom
methodology performance was compared, by means of quizzes, to the Project Team
Builder results. For the traditional classroom group, self-perception knowledge
in project management was compared to the Project Team Builder results.
For
the first scenario, the performance in the flipped classroom methodology
directly and proportionally affects the results in the Project Team Builder,
but not significantly (p<0.2205).
Surprisingly,
but not significantly (p<0.0529), for the second scenario, the performance
in the flipped classroom methodology affects inversely proportionally the
results in the Project Team Builder.
Stone
(1994) proved that positive expectations produce overconfidence, which may
affect negatively effort or attention to strategy. It would be the main reason
why flipped classroom methodology students who performed very well in the first
scenario then did not show up trained and ready for the second scenario.
Stone
also affirms that, in contrast, negative expectations increased effort and
attention to strategy. Probably because of that, students who performed poorly
then increased their effort and performed better.
In
conclusion, although there are slight indications that there is a correlation
between the flipped classroom methodology performance and the Project Team
Builder results, the null hypothesis is rejected, as the p-value is 0.22.
Experience in project management: Project management experience refers to students who have worked
in project management; it statistically affects the performance in the Project
Team Builder in the first scenario (p<0.0211). Those who had some experience
performed better, not only by methodology but also by observing each course. Some
papers confirm that job experience in a particular area directly affects
developing deeper knowledge in the area (Mikhail, Walther, & Willis, 1997;
Schmidt, Hunter, & Outerbridge, 1986).
Learning process in simulation-based training: In analogy to the effect proved on Hospitality and Restaurant Management students (Mansker, Fulks, Peters, Curtner, & Ogbeide, 2016) and what Wolfe (1993) affirmed, each run tends to improve the learning experience, panning and decision-making of the students, who perform better as long as they use the simulator.
4.7
Final Questionnaires
Satisfaction of the students-Students were asked to complete a questionnaire after the experiment to find out whether they appreciated the experiment and to measure their overall learning satisfaction.
In
agreement with the literature (Street, Gilliland, McNeil, & Royal, 2015;
Peterson, 2016), for all the satisfaction questions, students from flipped classroom
methodology were much quantitatively “happier”, also qualitatively, with the
experiment than those who studied in a traditional classroom.
Satisfaction in flipped classroom courses-It was clear that 3 out of 4 students would like to continue studying under the flipped classroom methodology. At the same time, 8 out of 10 in the case of the Technion and 9 out of 10 in the Universidad Tecnológica Nacional were extremely satisfied with the teaching staff during the classes. This is higher than the same question about the current situation asked in the initial questionnaires (7 out of 10).
5. Summary
Both
methodologies-flipped classroom methodology and simulation-based training-proved
to enhance learning. Flipped classroom methodology's success is evident when
analyzing students' satisfaction over those who studied in a traditional classroom.
The combination of both methodologies proved to be helpful for students,
especially in the first scenario where it can be seen that the influence of the
flipped classroom methodology on simulation-based training is high.
The
contribution of this research is twofold. First, from a theoretical
perspective, simulation-based training and flipped classroom methodology
literature is enriched and broadened by applying both teaching tool and
methodology in a unique multicultural context. Second, from a practical
perspective, an improvement in results, satisfaction and lessons learned was
found when using simulation-based training under the flipped classroom methodology
compared to using simulation-based training in a traditional classroom. Although
some recent research (Henderson & Trotta, 2016; Liu et al., 2017) addresses
the issue of combining flipped classroom methodology and simulation-based training
in the medical field, until now there has been no research integrating simulation-based
training and flipped classroom methodology for individual students from a
qualitative and quantitative point of view.
Our
thanks go to the Technion, National Technological University (Universidad
Tecnológica Nacional Buenos Aires), University of Nicosia, authorities,
professors and all participating students, without whose support the study
would not have been possible.
This
research was partially supported by a grant from The Bernard M. Gordon Center
for Systems Engineering at the Technion.
Alessi, S. M. (1988). Fidelity in the design of
instructional simulations. Journal
of Computer-Based Instruction, 15(2), 40-47.
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped
classroom: A survey of the research. Proceedings
of the ASEE National Conference, Atlanta, GA (Vol. 30, No. 9, pp. 1-18).
Critz, C. M., & Knight, D. (2013). Using the flipped
classroom in graduate nursing education. Nurse Educator, 38(5), 210-213. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0b013e3182a0e56a
Davidovitch, L., Parush, A., & Shtub, A. (2006).
Simulation-based learning in engineering education: Performance and transfer in
learning project management. Journal
of Engineering Education, 95(4), 289-299. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00904.x
Davidovitch, L., Parush, A., & Shtub, A. (2008).
Simulation-based learning: The learning-forgetting-relearning process and
impact of learning history. Computers
& Education, 50(3), 866-880.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.003
Davidovitch, L., Parush, A., & Shtub, A. (2009). The
impact of functional fidelity in simulator-based learning of project
management. International Journal of
Engineering Education, 25(2), 333-340.
Findlay-Thompson, S., & Mombourquette, P. (2014).
Evaluation of a flipped classroom in an undergraduate business course. Business Education &
Accreditation, 6(1), 63-71.
Fulton, K. (2012). Upside down and inside out: Flip your
classroom to improve student learning. Learning
& Leading with Technology, 39(8), 12-17.
Gaughan, J. E. (2014). The flipped classroom in world
history. History Teacher, 47(2),
221-244.
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B.
L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students' cognitive
engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and
motivation. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 29(4), 462-482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.006
Henderson, C., & Trotta, D. (2016). Infusing
simulation in classroom teaching. The
Journal for Research and Practice in College Teaching, 1(1), 1-5.
Herreid, C. F., & Schiller, N. A. (2013). Case
studies and the flipped classroom. Journal
of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 62-66.
Iluz, M., Moser, B., & Shtub, A. (2015). Shared
awareness among project team members through role-based simulation during
planning-a comparative study. Procedia
Computer Science, 44, 295-304.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.03.043
Jacobson, M. J., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex
systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications
for the learning sciences. The
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 11-34. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1501_4
Kim, H., & Jang, Y. (2017). Flipped learning with
simulation in undergraduate nursing education. Journal of Nursing Education, 56(6), 329-336.
https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20170518-03
Lichvar, A. B., Hedges, A., Benedict, N. J., &
Donihi, A. C. (2016). Combination of a flipped classroom format and a virtual
patient case to enhance active learning in a required therapeutics
course. American Journal of
Pharmaceutical Education, 80(10), 175.
Liu, Y. Y., Liu, C. Y., Hou, C. J. Y., Lin, C. Y., Chao,
C. L., Chen, C. H., ... & Shih, S. C. (2017). Simulation-based education
with flipped classrooms improve resident clinical performance in intensive care:
A pilot study. 醫學教育, 21(1), 1-8.
Mansker, V., Fulks, R., Peters, B., Curtner, R. M., & Ogbeide, G. C. (2016). Learning by doing: A case study of hospitality students’ learning experience via service learning/hands-on experience. Tourism Travel and Research Association: Advancing Tourism Research Globally.
Mikhail, M. B., Walther, B. R., & Willis, R. H. (1997). Do security analysts improve their performance with experience? Journal of Accounting Research, 35, 131-157. https://doi.org/10.2307/2491458
Miri, B., David, B. C., & Uri, Z. (2007). Purposely
teaching for the promotion of higher-order thinking skills: A case of critical thinking.
Research in Science Education, 37(4),
353-369.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9029-2
Perez, M. (2015). A
simulation based optimization approach for stochastic resource constrained
project management with milestones. Thesis, Rochester Institute of
Technology.
Peterson, D. J. (2016). The flipped classroom improves
student achievement and course satisfaction in a statistics course: A
quasi-experimental study. Teaching
of Psychology, 43(1), 10-15.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315620063
Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013).
The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through
active learning strategies. Journal of
Family & Consumer Sciences, 105(2), 44-49. https://doi.org/10.14307/JFCS105.2.12
Salas, E., Wildman, J. L., & Piccolo, R. F. (2009).
Using simulation-based training to enhance management education. Academy of Management Learning &
Education, 8(4), 559-573.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2009.47785474
Schmidt, F. L., Hunter, J. E., & Outerbridge, A. N.
(1986). Impact of job experience and ability on job knowledge, work sample
performance, and supervisory ratings of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3),
432-439. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.432
Shtub, A. (2004). PMT-the project management trainer. Proceedings of the Ninth International
Conference on Project Management and Scheduling (pp. 430-433).
Stone, D. N. (1994). Overconfidence in initial
self-efficacy judgments: Effects on decision processes and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 59(3), 452-474.
https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1994.1069
Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted
classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2),
171-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-012-9108-4
Street, S. E., Gilliland, K. O., McNeil, C., &
Royal, K. (2015). The flipped classroom improved medical student performance
and satisfaction in a pre-clinical physiology course. Medical Science Educator, 1(25), 35-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-014-0092-4
Tucker, B. (2012). The flipped classroom. Education Next, 12(1), 82-83.
Wolfe, J. (1993). A history of business teaching games
in English-speaking and post-socialist countries: The origination and diffusion
of a management education and development technology. Simulation & Gaming, 24(4), 446-463.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878193244003
Copyrights
Copyright
for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights
granted to the journal.
This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).